I totally agree with you... (have several of them myself, even one at work) but I doubt that my coworkers do...
At this moment we have 2 persons in de office with the real stuff andthe others with compaq keyboards. I know, the IBM keyboards are a bit noisy, but hey, the keys are at least were you expect them to be.
I would suspect that the old IBM keyboards were designed with sysadmins in mind and the current (I'm now typing on a new IBM terminal keyboard) with officemanagers, secretaries etc. etc. in mind. Those keys are a lot smaller and a lot easier to mis. Are they trying to drive the costs of operating computers up by adding smaller keyboards to induce more typos so you need more time for corrections?
Officially that is... Oh, without it you can't get into the systems for management.
The biggest problem here was getting the admins to use it. (it's all firewalled, so why should we...) The buffer overflow helped a bit, but we now mainly use it because of the easy to use (pointy clicky) user interface.
Since a year or 2 we have a tcl/tk menu wich allows you to log into a system without having to type ssh (telling that it was less work to type then telnet didn't work, aix has the tn alias...:-() and everybody now uses ssh.
In some corporations you have to misuse the lazyness of humans instead of their sence of security to get things done.
I'm now glad the internal network is almost as safe as my home net... (big organisations are hard to convince)
I's prefer to think that computers improve productivity, but to be honets, I doubt it.
I admit, computers make the life for the users easier (when they don't have to much problems or lack knowladge to use them).
When you look at the investment of work that is needed to build and operate the computers, educate the users and admins, construct usefull setups and all the other related work, I suspect even a small drop in efficienty.
But hey, I'm a sysadmin having fun playing with my toys, ranging from a simple PC to a nice RS6000 cluster. The best part is, I'm getting paid for having fun.
Without computers I would have to do a 'real' job. Yuck.;-)
Nice. As I read it correctly it's an addition to the 'shrink wrap' license.
The best thing about it, the 'shrink wrap' license is alreay illegal in The Netherlands as accoring to dutch law you can never agree on a license when you haven't read it. (and as the license is in the box, no way you could have read it without opening the shrink wrap)
Can't wait for the first case in court between a dutch company and an american software house.
Hmm... This looks like a defeat for the internet community, or does it...
To be honest, I doubt it. The idea is not only a proof that the politicians are not completely up-to-date with the current technology but it's also a proof that they have absolutely no idea what the internet is about or how an ISP works.
Having managed a setup for an ISP I doubt it that the plans the gevernment has have the faintest chance of being implemented.
The problem lays in the fact that first you need very nice hardware to be able to monitor the traffic that has to be monitored. Secondly you need very good software to limit the correct pages. (note, just filtering on XXX won't work, as you have pages 'without XXX-rated junk' or tricks like that)
Most software that could sort of do the trick which are currently sized for home use on a single pc with only one user. They are still having some problems with these packages as ther don't block all the correct pages.
When the government inforces these changes I also see some big bills going their way as it won't be cheap to implement it.
So on the software and/or hardware part I see no hope for the Australian government at this moment. Then we have a small problem with the ISPs. I doubt it that they are waiting for the big investment that is needed to implement this policy. A big provider is already offering global roaming to their costumers to allow them to dialin with their account in any country they're having a pop in. It's a small step to a global access number (think of 00800 numbers which are available in europe) so the costumers don't dialin to a australian provder but to a european or american provider.
As for Orwells 1984, it can be here when the government gets away with this (it's a small step from regulating traffic to recording it).
At worst I see it as a very expensive demonstration to all other governments that regulation of the internet traffic is impossible (or way to expensive). (On the other hand, they didn't learn from the experiment of China)
Slashdot Mirror
I totally agree with you... (have several of them myself, even one at work) but I doubt that my coworkers do...
At this moment we have 2 persons in de office with the real stuff andthe others with compaq keyboards. I know, the IBM keyboards are a bit noisy, but hey, the keys are at least were you expect them to be.
I would suspect that the old IBM keyboards were designed with sysadmins in mind and the current (I'm now typing on a new IBM terminal keyboard) with officemanagers, secretaries etc. etc. in mind. Those keys are a lot smaller and a lot easier to mis.
Are they trying to drive the costs of operating computers up by adding smaller keyboards to induce more typos so you need more time for corrections?
Officially that is... Oh, without it you can't get into the systems for management.
:-() and everybody now uses ssh.
The biggest problem here was getting the admins to use it. (it's all firewalled, so why should we...) The buffer overflow helped a bit, but we now mainly use it because of the easy to use (pointy clicky) user interface.
Since a year or 2 we have a tcl/tk menu wich allows you to log into a system without having to type ssh (telling that it was less work to type then telnet didn't work, aix has the tn alias...
In some corporations you have to misuse the lazyness of humans instead of their sence of security to get things done.
I'm now glad the internal network is almost as safe as my home net... (big organisations are hard to convince)
I's prefer to think that computers improve productivity, but to be honets, I doubt it.
;-)
I admit, computers make the life for the users easier (when they don't have to much problems or lack knowladge to use them).
When you look at the investment of work that is needed to build and operate the computers, educate the users and admins, construct usefull setups and all the other related work, I suspect even a small drop in efficienty.
But hey, I'm a sysadmin having fun playing with my toys, ranging from a simple PC to a nice RS6000 cluster. The best part is, I'm getting paid for having fun.
Without computers I would have to do a 'real' job. Yuck.
Nice. As I read it correctly it's an addition to the 'shrink wrap' license.
The best thing about it, the 'shrink wrap' license is alreay illegal in The Netherlands as accoring to dutch law you can never agree on a license when you haven't read it. (and as the license is in the box, no way you could have read it without opening the shrink wrap)
Can't wait for the first case in court between a dutch company and an american software house.
Hmm... This looks like a defeat for the internet community, or does it...
To be honest, I doubt it. The idea is not only a proof that the politicians are not completely up-to-date with the current technology but it's also a proof that they have absolutely no idea what the internet is about or how an ISP works.
Having managed a setup for an ISP I doubt it that the plans the gevernment has have the faintest chance of being implemented.
The problem lays in the fact that first you need very nice hardware to be able to monitor the traffic that has to be monitored. Secondly you need very good software to limit the correct pages. (note, just filtering on XXX won't work, as you have pages 'without XXX-rated junk' or tricks like that)
Most software that could sort of do the trick which are currently sized for home use on a single pc with only one user. They are still having some problems with these packages as ther don't block all the correct pages.
When the government inforces these changes I also see some big bills going their way as it won't be cheap to implement it.
So on the software and/or hardware part I see no hope for the Australian government at this moment. Then we have a small problem with the ISPs. I doubt it that they are waiting for the big investment that is needed to implement this policy. A big provider is already offering global roaming to their costumers to allow them to dialin with their account in any country they're having a pop in. It's a small step to a global access number (think of 00800 numbers which are available in europe) so the costumers don't dialin to a australian provder but to a european or american provider.
As for Orwells 1984, it can be here when the government gets away with this (it's a small step from regulating traffic to recording it).
At worst I see it as a very expensive demonstration to all other governments that regulation of the internet traffic is impossible (or way to expensive). (On the other hand, they didn't learn from the experiment of China)